!agree

I think @Timcast really needs to put a lot more thought into his support of the Green New Deal. It just seems like a bad policy to me. Firstly, there seems to be credible evidence emerging all the time that shows that the climate change models exaggerated the extent of the problem. But mostly, I want to point out that it sounds like the most reckless thing that you could do. We already know that no matter what we do, we can only make a trivial difference to whatever climate change is coming, so why risk destroying the entire economy just to make a meaninglessly small impact to the climate? It would be so much smarter to just accept climate change and then improve our emissions slowly. We could spend money on improving infrastructure to better cope with natural disasters and minimise the potential for damage. That would generate actual outcomes. The problem with leftist policies like Obamacare and the New Green Deal is that they seem to be guided by a noble cause but the people who write these policies are clearly more concerned with being able to virtue signal about the policy after the fact, than in making decisions that would lead to the best possible outcomes.

A green deal would do much worse than a recession. Hell, the original New Deal prolonged the depression

Yeah I think the economic recovery will speed up once the battle with China advances a bit more. The tariffs will go away (or at least be reduced significantly) and the markets will become less tense

I just don't understand Democrats for allowing their leaders to be so hypocritical. I know people accept this sort of thing all the time in office politics, but that's just people being conniving so they can get a promotion. Why would you actually want to vote for people who might destroy your way of life?

Yeah I don't wish Ruth dead either, but I think there's something strange going on there. I spoke to a nurse and she said that the media is lying about Ruth. They're trying to spin it to sound like they only removed nodules from her lungs, but there is no such operation possible. They removed a whole lobe. And the media says that they found no cancer has spread in her body. But its not actually possible to be certain about this. Considering the fact that this is her third time with cancer, I say it doesn't look so good. My theory is that she is getting very weak and wants to retire but people are aggressively pressuring her to keep working in spite of the pain and/or exhaustion

If she doesn't die from cancer, she'll die from the pressure

Ben Shapiro as president is a very interesting idea, and I think he could do great things.

@Wulfolme maybe a little lol

@Vannevariable Well they were trying to mislead. And I think the worst was when the media turned on Bill O'Reilly for pointing out that it was bad news for the left

My immediate feeling was that their anger was truly driven by the fact that he refused to play along with the narrative that Ruth has more years of service in her

Yeah thats the correct name

Yeah from what I've read, her lungs should recover fine from the surgery. But you watch her in interviews and she seems to struggle to get the energy to talk, even before the surgery. Something doesn't look right

I've seen a guy on TV who is 107 years old and he seems to have more energy then Ruth

@ro wait... isn't rhodesia a country that used to exist in africa?

so when you say "rhodesian" food i'm guessing you're not talking about food cooked by the natives of that area

oh ok

high? on drugs?

oh ok lol

interesting

who are these guys in that video. they seem like mob lawyers

there are places where you can race cars legally. i imagine you can drift there, for a fee

do tim doesn't talk here much?

**so

But the Streisand effect really applies if your strategy is primarily to make a demand that people can ignore. Twitter has some power of enforcement on their platform

But how many major social media platforms allow furry porn?

are you a furry?

ok. i have never been really had a chance to understand what the fascination is about the furry culture. there's very few unbiased opinions about it that i could learn from

so long as its not too graphic about the worst of the culture

i've heard bad things

about a minority of furries

ok i'll be interested to check these suggestions out

thanks guys

@Pendell People often say that you see these things on both sides, but there seems to be a lot more evidence of it on the left. Turn on the news and you see thousands of protesters who can't give a coherent answer about what they're protesting about. Then you check out one of the (less frequent) right wing protests and it's about something specific and everyone knows why they're there. For example compare the women's march to the march for life. One is an ambiguous mess, and the other is a clear and well defined cause

I don't use facebook

when people talk about the "rights" old craziness, they're basically just talking about evangelical christians, which is just one religious sect out of many groups on the right

There's a big difference between people protesting for no reason, and people believing in the prophecies of a religion

You're getting the whole thing messed up comparing apples to oranges.

A person's beliefs vs another persons actions

its very fascistic to be critical of someone's personal beliefs if that belief manifests itself only in their speech. who cares what someone believes, so long as they're not hurting you or anyone else?

because the expectation is that in an ideal world, people will think what you want them to think. that's your basis for how you measure progress. and I think that in an ideal world, people will refrain from actions that hurt other people

thats reasonable to only want to curtail the harm

well the way you spoke about it, gives that impression. because you're saying left and right are similar problems

give an example

of what they agree on

i think you're oversimplifying the definition of sexism

@Grenade123 There's a difference between wanting to debate someone's beliefs and thinking that somebody simply believing something different is on the same level as someone who wants to riot and shut down the economic system

I never said there was something wrong with debate

sexism is kind of an overused word though

and means many things

and there is evidence that traditional gender roles leads to more happiness in relationships and in life

how is a re-eduction camp as bad as wanting kids to die SMH

this is insane

@devpav I agree

Any experience that is abusive can cause trauma and suicidal thoughts. And most experiences can be done in a way that is not abusive

@Pendell What you're talking about is a political belief

You believe that homosexuality is something people are born with in spite of evidence that people can change their sexual preferences. and therefore your conclusion is that asking someone to change is an abuse

Then what does bisexual mean?

Some christians volunteer to attend workshops to get over their gay urges

And people on the left hate this

That's not being forced in this situation

But you made a blanket statement

You said that the camps are abusive. You didn't say that their parents forcing them to attend was abusive

Still though... the massive flaw in this argument is that @Grenade123 brought this thing up and compared it to the covington situation which is a typical false equivalency between left and right. People like you will pick some fringe activity of some small group on the right and compare it to something mainstream on the left.

*relatively small

My family is christian and I have never heard of anybody in our church or community even thinking of sending someone to gay conversion camps. there was a gay teen at my family's church

it is prominent journalists on the left

and celebrities

and a ton of people on twitter.

yeah and yet somehow the dems keep supporting this crazy rhetoric on TV

how is it still on TV if nobody agrees?

Fox gets a lot because there's not many options on the right

on TV

I've seen the ratings. the left networks combined are more than the rights

people on the right are often voting against the lefts policies

people on the left are often voting against the people on the right. not necessarily the policies

nah i think a lot of it is "those republicans are racists I don't want to hear what they're saying"

I'm a black guy and a LOT of blacks have this attitude

black people actually are more aligned with republican policy but they vote democrat because of personality

i wouldn't wear a maga hat

dangerous

being gay had some danger to it in certain places. because they were seen as weak targets for criminals

but today being a guy in a MAGA hat makes you a target of non-crimiinals

what i mean is... gay people were attacked as a form of business. some criminals were just out looking to make some money.

it was an enterprise

but now, people who would normally be law abiding are being violent because of a hat

definitely

probably.

Recently @Timcast said he agrees with AOC on a lot of issues. I want to see him address this Green New Deal.

depends on whose perspective we're seeing it from. Trump's people love it because it is very easy to make a campaign against. Usually democrats hide their ultimate goal and take little steps towards it. Obamacare was a little step towards Medicare for all. Roe v Wade was a little step towards infanticide etc.

But AOC is being honest.

I love the bit about cows.

Yeah some times I wonder if she is controlled opposition

I think the issue is that the Dems don't understand Trump. They think that she can be the same kind of force that he was.

They use similar tactics but Trump is really pursuing traditional conservative policies. While she is going crazy

she can run in 2024 tho

I look forward to it